Learn English – etymology of “ie” versus “ei” words

The etymological fallacy does not state that knowing the etymology of a word will lead you to misunderstand its present meaning, it merely states that the original meaning is not necessarily systematically equated to the present meaning which, on the face of it, seems a fair statement.

The etymological fallacy is a genetic fallacy that holds, erroneously, that the historical meaning of a word or phrase is necessarily similar to its actual present-day meaning.

That is however a reductive use of the word etymology itself.

Etymology cannot be reduced to the original meaning of a word (if there ever was such a thing – words themselves having a life of their own). Instead it has to be envisioned as the whole path that leads from former meanings to present day meanings. It is not a static snapshot taken at an arbitrary point in the past; it is, as much as one can reconstruct it, the whole history of how words and cultures interact with each other to lead from stems to words and meanings. It is a dynamic thing leading to the present.

Let's take just one example: to tally. If you look it up online in the free dictionary, you will discover a whole list of apparently unrelated meanings such as:

• To reckon or count.
• To record by making a mark.
• to score (a point or goal) in a game or contest.
• To be alike; correspond or agree.

The way these seemingly unrelated meanings are actually connected becomes glaringly obvious if you know the etymology of the word: The base meaning of a tally is "a tick marked with notches to indicate amount owed or paid" (see French une entaille).

In the old times, people would keep counts of what they owed to each other by dividing a stick in two pieces and each time a new debt was contracted a new notch (a tally) was carved into the reunited pieces. Each party would keep its own piece and, every now and then, accounts were settled with the two pieces matching. Because two different sticks can't be broken in the same way, there was no possible argument.

This is the kind of gem etymology brings to the knowledge of a given language.

Etymonline.com says the meaning of making somebody self-conscious is first recorded in 1828 and shows a French and Italian origin:

1670s, "perplex, throw into doubt," from Fr. embarrasser (16c.), lit. "to block," from embarras "obstacle," from It. imbarrazzo, from imbarrare "to bar," from in- "into, upon" (see in- (2)) + V.L. **barra* "bar." Meaning "hamper, hinder" is from 1680s. Meaning "make (someone) feel awkward" first recorded 1828. Original sense preserved in embarras de richesse (1751), from French (1726): the condition of having more wealth than one knows what to do with.

The OED says the etymology is from "French embarrasser, lit. ‘to block, obstruct’, < embarras" and their first quotation for making someone feel awkward is from Webster's 1828 An American dictionary of the English language.

Here's Webster from 1828 (plain text):

Q: and how did it come to have the meaning of making somebody self-conscious and abashed?

It originally meant to literally encumber, to hamper or to impede; or to perplex, to confuse. It later then came to the modern meaning, as in OED's definition 2.b.:

To make (a person) feel awkward or ashamed, esp. by one's speech or actions; to cause (someone) embarrassment.

So one's speech or actions are stopping and perplexing the other, which causes the feeling of awkwardness.

Here's some examples from the introduction to Webster's 1828 dictionary that show the different meanings:

• I found myself embarrassed, at every step, for want of a knowledge of the origin of words

• Similar contractions have taken place in all other languages; a circum- stance that embarrasses the philologist and lexicographer at every step of his researches; and which has led to innumerable mistakes in Etymology.

• Lexicographers are often embarrassed to account for the different signifi- cation of words that are evidently derived from the same root.

• This practice of blending with the English many words of an orthography, which in our language is anomalous, is very embarrassing to readers who know only their vernacular tongue, and often introduces an odious difference between the pronunciation of different classes of people

• On the other hand, all that I have seen, serve only to obscure and embarrass the subject, by substituting new arrangements and new terms, which are as incorrect as the old ones, and less intelligible.